George Eulas Foster
Conservative (1867-1942)
Mr. FOSTER.
I rise to a point of order.
Mr. FOSTER.
I rise to a point of order.
Mr. LENNOX.
We found that the government were going back upon the policy they had adopted on the 21st and a discussion which arose was determined on the 24th by a straight party vote in which the government not only went back on their Mr. LENNOX.
Mr. SPEAKER.
What is the point of order?
Mr. D. ROSS.
I rise to a point of order.
Mr. FOSTER.
I assert that my point of order be taken because it would prevent-
Mr. SPEAKER.
The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) is plainly out of order. The hon. member for Yale-Cariboo (Mr. Ross) rose to a point of order and I have not heard what that point of order is.
Mr. FOSTER.
In making that point of order he imputed motives-
Order.
Mr. FOSTER.
-and it is
Order.
Mr. FOSTER.
-on that point
Order.
Mr. FOSTER.
-that I raise the point of order.
Mr. FIELDING.
Let the hon. member for Yale-Cariboo present his point of order and then we will take the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Foster) point of order.
Mr. FOSTER.
I rise to know whether the hon. gentleman has the right or not-
Order.
Mr. SPEAKER.
Order. Let the hon. gentlemen both take their seats for a moment. If I understand the position it is that the hon. member for Yale-Cariboo rose to a point of order, and in the course of his statement of the point of order he stated that the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lennox) who had the floor was proceeding for obstructive tactics. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) then rises in the midst of the point of order that the hon. member for Yale-Cariboo is taking, to take the point of order that the suggestion that the hon. member who has the floor is taking the course he is for obstructive tactics, imputes a motive to that hon. gentleman. That, of course, is a proper point to be taken at any time.
Mr. FOSTER.
Then I rise to that point of order and ask you if-
Mr. SPEAKER.
Order.
Mr. D. ROSS.
In order that my point of order may be properly before the House I have no hesitation in withdrawing the suggestion that they were purely obstructive tactics.